Category: Separation/Unity

Primary Separation, Secondary Separation, Ecclesiastical Separation, oh, and Unity

Important Free Book: “Finding the Right Hills to Die On” by Gavin Ortlund

~ Bob Hayton ~ 2 Comments

The Gospel Coalition is giving away a free ebook this week that you’ll want to download. Finding the Right Hills to Die On: The Case for Theological Triage by Gavin Ortlund is a fantastic treatment of the relative importance of doctrines and the need for unity in essentials and charity with regard to nonessentials. You can get a download of the book from this link.

I have been blessed by Dr. Al Mohler’s concept of theological triage and this is a book-length consideration of this idea. I’ve added my own thoughts on the importance of this question here, and in many other posts over the years.

Dr. Ortlund, the author, shares his own theological journey but aims not to convince us of any of his positions but rather to help us think through how to do theology and how to think about the relative importance of doctrines. So far this book looks really good.

If you stumble upon this post later and the book is no longer free, you can purchase a copy at any of the following links:

Book Briefs: “Still Protesting: Why the Reformation Matters” by D. G. Hart

~ Bob Hayton ~ Leave a comment

500 years ago the Reformation was transforming Europe. Politics and nation-states would be affected, but the relationship of the average Christian to the Church was forever altered. Protestant Evangelical Christians look back on the Reformation with gratitude. The Reformation recovered the Christian Gospel of grace after all. But the contemporary Church has wandered far from the faith of its fathers, and more than ever before calls for denominational unity and even ecumenical togetherness with Rome are hitting home. Secularism is a threat to Catholic and confessing Protestant alike, so why not band together? How big, after all, are the points that separate us? Didn’t the Roman Catholic Church reform in the wake of the Reformation too?

It is these questions and this concern that D. G. Hart addresses head on in his recent book Still Protesting: Why the Reformation Matters (Reformation Heritage, 2018). Hart expertly unfolds the history of the Reformation and evaluates key evangelical truths (including the important “5 Solas”) as compared to the historical Roman Catholicism of that day. He goes on to examine whether the Roman Catholic Church has truly changed in its stance on these points over time. In his case against Rome, Hart also finds liberal Protestantism and lackadaisical evangelicalism at fault as well. He argues that the Reformation is still needed and a return to the faith of our fathers may well help American Christianity as it faces its own cross-roads.

An intriguing feature of the book is his examination of conservative political theory in America in relation to “anti-Catholic” sentiment. Historically, Protestants looked at the “golden age” of America as an advance in the history of the West (almost a postmillennial viewpoint) and lauded the rise of democracy and liberty. However “Roman Catholics saw those same developments negatively, as declension from an ideal time when church, government, society, and culture coexisted harmoniously under the sacred canopy of Christian influence” (p. 152). As progressive politics moved on to promote social change and “progress” in general – Catholicism’s opposition to unfettered equality and freedom became more in-step with conservatism’s resistance to progressive politics. For those who have wanted to “dissent from the logic and momentum of progressive politics” more help is found “for political conservatism in Roman Catholic sources” (p. 159). This leads to the pain-point that Hart is addressing: many political conservatives today claim that to be a true conservative, you must become a Roman Catholic. In response, Hart points to Abraham Kuyper (an evangelical leader and Prime Minister of The Netherlands) and J. Gresham Machen (founder of Westminster Theological Seminary) as examples of Protestant contributions to conservatism.

What sparked my interest in that section of the book was his point that American Protestantism had developed a “form of patriotism that unhealthily equated the faith with democracy and liberty” (p. 159). Protestantism’s fight against Catholicism mirrored democracy’s fight against the Monarchy. The founders of our country very much fit in with this patriotic version of faith. Indeed, this patriotism must have enabled the onset of the “social gospel.” Today’s patriotic, “God and Country” version of evangelical “faith,” which is “unhealthy” and unbiblical, has a long history indeed.

Those well-versed in the Reformation are sure to find new insights and connections in the pages of this book. Readers less familiar with the Reformation will also be helped. Anyone interested in what really separates Protestants from Catholics will find this book useful. I highly recommend it.

Pick up a copy of this book at any of the following online retailers:
Westminster Bookstore, Amazon, ChristianBook.com, or direct from Reformation Heritage.

Disclaimer: This book was provided by the publisher. The reviewer was under no obligation to offer a positive review.

About Book Briefs: Book Briefs are book notes, or short-form book reviews. They are my informed evaluation of a book, but stop short of being a full-length book review.

Together for the Gospel: Northland & Southern

~ Bob Hayton ~ 19 Comments

I was excited to hear recently that Northland International University (formerly Northland Baptist Bible College) was formally accepted by The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary and will become Boyce College at Northland. Northland’s president, Daniel Patz and Southern’s president, Albert Mohler announced the news. See this link for a fuller story. The video below provides additional details.

For many independent Baptists, this step is unthinkable – and it marks the end of faithfulness. Another college has capitulated. But have they really? What is the point of breaking off of groups like the Southern Baptist Conference? Wasn’t it to preserve doctrine or take a stand for truth? The SBC turned around, and under Mohler’s leadership among others, the SBC is now a bastion for theological conservatism. Sure Southern has an emphasis on Reformed theology that many Baptists are leery of. But the majority of Southern Baptists do not embrace Reformed theology wholeheartedly. In many respects, the SBC is a mirror image of many groups of independent Baptists. There is a lot of autonomy in the SBC structure. And that Baptist autonomy is part of the problem when it comes to assessing the SBC. The SBC is not completely pure in every respect, because it is not an entity that can cause direct change in a top-down sort of way. The very independence and autonomy that independent fundamental Baptists prize is the reason that many of them view the SBC with suspicion.

Looking at Northland, by joining with Boyce College, Northland continues its overall mission. And in difficult financial times (for all private colleges everywhere) this decision makes sense. Both the SBC and the IFBs who have supported Northland over the years, are driven by a Great Commission calling. Both of them long to stand for truth and equip students to live courageously for Christ in today’s world. Strategic partnerships and inter-dependence among churches and missionaries — that is what we see as we read the book of Acts and study the early years of Church history.

Perhaps it is time to reevaluate the status of the IFB movement. Are churches staying independent just to be different? Are they insular and isolationist or is independence a means to a healthy end? Why must there be three, four or even five IFB churches that have virtually nothing to do with each other in the same town? Why can’t we overlook minor differences and truly stand together for the Gospel? We can respect differences and appreciate distinctives even as we work together around bigger realities and shared Gospel truths. That is what is driving Northland’s actions.

May we see more Christ-honoring inter-dependence in the future. “Behold, how good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell together in unity!” (Ps. 133:1).

Quotes to Note 39: Alec Motyer on the Church

~ Bob Hayton

Alec Motyer has spent his life studying the riches of Isaiah, and I’m almost finished enjoying the fruits of his study so helpfully laid out in Isaiah By the Day: A New Devotional Translation (Christian Focus, 2011). In each of the daily readings in this book, Motyer presents his translation with commentary and offers a devotional in line with the text of that day’s passage. I came across a jewel of a quote about the Church, with special focus on denominations and how each local church is to be a picture of the whole Church. I thought it was a great way to look at things and offer it hear for your benefit as well.

The truth remains the same today: the Lord’s earthly people are themselves the temple in which he lives by his Spirit (1 Cor. 3:16), the locus and display of his holiness and beauty. Well may we mourn that our sinfulness, divisiveness, our failure in biblical distinctiveness, and our manifest lack of holiness have marred the image. Who, looking at today’s church–denominational or local–can see the likeness of Jesus? And this is not a matter only of denominational failure, though that is all too plain. The Bible knows nothing of our “denominationalism,” and if Isaiah’s wording promts us to put our hand to reform and renovation then its proper focus is the local church to which we each belong. When we look at the merest sliver of a crescent moon we don’t say, “Oh, there’s part of the moon.” We say “Look, there’s the moon.” In the same way each local church, however small–or in the eyes of onlookers, insignificant–is meant to be a mirror and image of the whole, an earthly replica of the heavenly reality where Christ is all. We should be able to look at the fellowships to which we belong and say, “There is The Church,” bearing the two oustanding marks of holiness and beauty: obeying the command, “Be holy because I am holy” (Lev. 19:2), and displaying the beauty of Jesus in all its gatherings, relationships and individual characters.

~ excerpted from p. 306, on Isaiah 63:15-64:12.

For a sample reading from this helpful book by Motyer, see this post.

Northland, SBTS, and the Next Chapter for Fundamentalism

~ Bob Hayton ~ 4 Comments

Northland International University (formerly Northland Baptist Bible College) just announced a formal partnership with The Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY. NIU President, Daniel Patz says this move will “energize our mission, and anchor our institutional stability for generations.” You can read some of Al Mohler’s comments on this partnership and learn more about the announcement here.

I have some positive reflections on this move, for Northland in particular. And I have a question about Fundamentalism’s next chapter.

Positives for Northland

1) Students at Northland can see that their degree may mean more now, with an academic institution like Southern “backing” it.

2) There are lots of churches who are loosely IFB but not committed to one particular sphere or fellowship, this partnership makes Northland attractive to some of these churches now.

3) It allows Northland to receive help from another institution and continue to exist – and in the area of Northland there are not an abundance of conservative evangelical schools of any stripe.

4) It expands the base of Northland to other conservative churches aware of Southern but not necessarily aware of Northland.

Fundamentalism’s Next Chapter?

Remember this is a connection with a particular institution not the SBC as a whole, nor every SBC seminary, just Southern. As such, Northland doesn’t have to be seen as eschewing fundamentalism. Fundamentalism was a para-denominational idea to unite around the gospel. Might it not be time for conservative IFB churches to unite more formally as NIU is doing here, with conservative bastions of evangelicalism, whether they be The Master’s College, Southern, or what have you?

The IFB movement prizes independence. Northland is acting independently. They already forged a partnership with the CCEF, and now with Southern. This is not old-school fundamentalism, but it might just be the natural progression of the growth of Type B/C Fundamentalism.

What exactly would be the case for separating from Northland for partnering with Southern? What exactly is the case for not sending students to Southern, or for being willing to send them to The Master’s College but not Southern?

Is Fundamentalism an idea that is more important than a movement? Time will tell. For now, I applaud Northland for being willing to go their own way and unite around what matters. Some will “nay say,” but for Fundamentalism to stay relevant to the church both now and into the future, it is exatly this kind of independent thinking (that stays true to the spirit of historic fundamentalism) that will be needed.